V. CONCLUSION
The Court is sensitive to the plight of mobility-impaired and other disabled individuals. The testimony of Kirola, class members, and mothers of class members effectively established the daily challenges confronting disabled individuals. Both federal and state law afford disabled individuals, including Kirola and members of the class, the right to meaningfully access the programs, activities and services provided by a public entity. At the same time, Article III of the United States Constitution requires that Kirola prove that she has standing to pursue claims on behalf of the class—which she has failed to do. Nevertheless, even if Kirola had satisfied that threshold burden, the record does not support her contention that the City has failed to comply with its obligations under Title II of the ADA and related federal and state statutes. To the contrary, the trial record establishes that the City is complying with its obligation to provide meaningful access, including program access, to its public right-of-way, libraries, swimming pools, and parks and recreational facilities. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT in accordance with this Order, final judgment shall be entered in favor of the City. The Clerk shall close the file and terminate any pending matters.
IT IS SO ORDERED.Dated: November 26, 2014
/s/_________
SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG
United States District Judge
User Comments/Questions
Add Comment/Question